Bush’s Strike on Bagdãd – 9 April 2003.
Bush’s attack on Baġdād raises some curious issues, some of which include: to what extent were there actual participation by the American populace (e.g., by referendum), in the decision-making process, for central government, to have made this strike. Did Bush act within a valid interpretation of the great ‘American State Papers’ (v.i.). By the unequivocal concealment of the known facts, regarding al-ʿIrāq, from the people. And did Bush, by not having made adequate transparent facts accessible, to the populace. Had he in effect, excluded them from participation in government “…of the people, by the people, and for the people …” (Abraham Lincoln, (16 President of the U.S.) Gettysburg, 19 November 1863)). The answers to these questions automatically present themselves in the existent, and apparent, concealment from the populace, on the pretext of ‘weapons of mass destruction’ et cetera.
Bush’s invasion has brought about continuous ‘injuries and usurpations’, and a ‘tyrannical’ form of government – controlled by U.S’s., domestic policies – behind the façade of ‘democracy’ and ‘human rights’. Comparing Bush’s attack on the innocent people of al-ʿIrāq, with the ‘American State Papers’ (v.i.) reveal a flagrant deficit of constitutionalism in his foreign policies. ‘The Declaration of Independence’ – Thomas Jefferson, 3rd President of the U.S. – adopted on 4 July 1776, stated that the then King of Great Britain (G.B.), and Ireland: Georg Wilhelm Friedrich III (1760-1820), had inflicted ” .. repeated injuries and usurpations .. .”, and “…an absolute tyranny over these states” (l. 25 – 28), and “He has kept among us, in time of peace, standing armies, without the consent of our legislatures” (l. 58 – 9); and “… cutting off our trade with all parts of the world” (l. 69).
Furthermore, ‘The Constitution of The United States of America’ (17 September, 1787) says:
“No State shall, without the consent of Congress, lay any duty of tonnage, keep troops or ships of war in time of peace, enter into any agreement or compact with another State or with a foreign power, or engage in war, unless actually invaded or in such imminent danger as will not admit of delay” (l. 314-20).
Subsequent to the Declaration of Independence (1776), the U.S., resembling King Georg III, of G.B., has repeatedly committed ‘injurious’ acts in other nation states, ‘overturned heads of state’, ‘exercised arbitrary power’, sanctioned ‘tyrannical governments’, ‘deployed troops’ into other sovereignties, and imposition ’embargoes’. I believe, the attack on the people of al-ʿIrāq, was a contradiction of contemporary U.S’s foreign policies. And the objections they raised, in ‘The Declaration of Independence’, regarding the foreign policies of G.B’s., King Georg III.
Photograph above. The Attack on Baġdād, on 2 April, 2003. Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper.
Al-ʿIrāq’s former despotic Hussein has gone, but the unabated killings are continuing. Both innocent al-ʿIrāqi citizens, and honourable United States servicemen, and women, continue losing their lives. The war in al-ʿIrāq, I believe, has a déjà vu familiarity with the former protracted and futile Second Indochina War (1955-75), or what the Vietnamese called: “Kháng chiến chống Mỹ” (‘Resistance War Against America’). The Indochina War resulted in the loss of 2,058,000 qq.v., innocent Vietnamese citizens, and 58,226qq.v., crème de la crème of American youth killed or missing. The attack on Baġdād appears to be a somewhat reoccurrence of the Indochina War. Al-ʿIrāq war, like its Indochina predecessor, will continue in an increasing astronomical loss of human lives, suffering (both Americans and al-ʿIrāqis), and enormous amount of damage to al-ʿIrāq’s essential infrastructures. Additionally, it will continue exacerbating contentions among the various factions of the Arab, Kurd, Turk (et al.) population including other groups, viz., Shī‘ah Muslim, Sunnī Muslim, Jews, Christians, and a variety of small sects.
Blood, oil and Water.
Bush’s euphemistic rhetoric on ‘human rights’ and ‘democracy’ was an appalling pretext for invading al-ʿIrāq for, sit venia verbo; ‘Blood for Oil’, and this becomes very transparent when recalling the occasions when the U.S., (et al.) remained silent on issues of ‘human rights’ whilst despotic régimes committed atrocities against their people in countries without copious oil endowments. The motives become even more evident after consideration of some other factors that represent very long term economic benefits for the United States et al.
Motives for The Strike.
Al-ʿIrāq is considered to have one of the largest oil reserves is the world. The oil reserves are one of the pivotal points in the U.S. to maintain a continuous presence in the region. To secure uninterrupted oil volumes at nominal costs, and sustain a monopoly to exclude foreign contenders namely, Russia and China. At present, there is a world oil aggregate of approximately “2,390,000,000,000 barrels”. “Seventy-seven percent” has been struck of which “30 percent” has been depleted. The present rate of production and supply is estimated to last until approximately “2050”; after which it is ‘expected to subside’ (Encyclopædia Britannica 2003). Al-ʿIrāq is unaware of the quantity of barrels being exported, the price tags, or who receives the revenue.
Al-ʿIrāq is also considered to have expansive river networks including, the two great rivers: the Nahr ul-Furāt, 1,740 miles lg. And the Nahr Dijlah 1,180 miles lg., as well as effectual dams, e.g., the Darbandikhan. This is the other point of which, I perceive, as an opportunistic determination for the U.S., to retain its long term presence in the Middle East.
The Water Supply, Anatomy of Greed.
Both the Nahr ul-Furāt, and the Nahr Dijlah, are now geopolitically constituted as South-East Turkey, Eastern Syria, and al-ʿIrāq. [The Greeks and Romans formerly referred to the territory as ‘Mesopotamia’ (‘The land between the two rivers’); until the Arab conquest circa 7th century].
The source of the Nahr ul-Furāt, and the Nahr Dijlah water supply originates from the subtropical Arm’anskoje Nagor’e, or Armenian Highland 5,000-6,500 feet asl in Eastern Turkey. Each river, at the source, are separated by approximately 50 miles. Both the Nahr ul-Furāt travels south for 776 miles, and the Nahr Dijlah 326 miles prior to reaching the Syrian and al-ʿIrāq border. The Nahr ul-Furāt journeys, through Syria, for 220 miles q.l. to the Syrian-al-ʿIrāq border, and crosses into al-ʿIrāq on an approximate winding path of 475 miles south-east to Al-Qurnah. The Nahr Dijlah travels 25 miles q.l. parallel to the Syrian-al-ʿIrāq border and into al-ʿIrāq. It journeys, first for an approximate 95 miles to the Az-Zab al-Kabii, or ‘Great Zab’, 93 miles lg. And a further 58 miles to the Az-Zab as-Saghir or ‘Little Zab’ (155 miles lg), and then the Diyālā (186 miles lg.). It journeys 380 miles south-eastward, via Baghdãd, to al-Qurnah where it merges with the Nahr ul-Furāt. Which travel a further 100 miles (q.v.) downstream, and ultimately discharging into the Bahr Fāris (‘Arabian Gulf’).
Conflict of Interests.
There has been conflict of interest regarding access to the Nahr ul-Furāt, and the Nahr Dijlah river systems. Differing opinions exist between al-ʿIrāq, Syria and Iran as to who has national prerogative to draw off from the rivers. The riverine composite hasn’t adequate water capacity to sustain these nations’ requirements. forces exacerbated by Turkey’s construction of 22 dams. Including the Ataturk, (604 ft Emb., and 5,971 ft. long), completed in 1990, and 19 hydroelectric installations, built during the 1980s and ’90s at the upper aspects of the rivers. Additionally, Syria had completed its Tabaqah Dam (197 ft. high and almost 3 miles in length) in 1973, which forms Lake Assad (50 miles length, and 5 miles width). A powerhouse was added in 1977 to supply electricity to Al-JazYrah, and surrounding districts. This has had an adverse effect on al-ʿIrāq’s water levels. In 1974 al-ʿIrāq troops grouped at the Syrian border and cautioned Syria of its intent to bomb al-Thawra dam on Al-Furāts. Irag and Iran had shared sovereignty over the 25-mile banks q.l., of al-ʿIrāq-Iran border, the Shatt al-‘Arab river; the historic border between the two countries. But al-ʿIrāq broke the historic border-arrangement, by invading Western Iran on 22 September 1980, and captured the city of Khorramshahr, and other areas. Later in the following year (1982) it voluntarily withdrew its troops and sought a peace pact with Iran.
Israel’s Kinneret-Negev Conduit (‘National Water Carrier’) – built in 1964 – conveys water from the Yam Kinneret (‘Sea of Galilee’), which is 686 ft. bsl, and has surface area of 64 square miles, with a depth of 157 ft. q.l., at the northeast aspect, and it measures 13 miles and 7 miles from north-south, and east-west aspects respectively. The Conduit transports the water to the coastal area and the Negev Desert. The water flow is supported by two pumping stations. One to raise the water to approximately 800 ft., (above the Yam Kinneret water level), to be carried to Nahal ‘Ammud and Zalmon. And the other to raise the water again for the Bet Netofa valley from there the water is conveyed, by pipes; to the western regions. Water is supplied, by Israel, to the West Bank, and the Jordan, under the ‘Israel-Jordan Treaty of Peace’ agreement. Precipitation lasts for 60 days (q.v.) between October and April. The water has, at times, fell to a very low level, due to a meagre annual precipitation of approximate 1 inch per year in the south. And a maximum of 44 inches in the north.
I believe the U.S., has long-term plans, firstly in securing al-ʿIrāq’s oil, and secondly, in securing and controlling the distribution of al-ʿIrāq’s water. This was made achievable by the U.S., and the “Coalition of the willing” attacking al-ʿIrāq’s capital city Baġdād (19th March 2003). And removing the most problematic impediment: al-ʿIrāq’s President Hussein. And his Hizbal al-Ba‘th al-‘Arabī Allishtirākī (Arab Socialist Ba‘th Party), who in 1972, with the previous President Ahmad Hassan al-Bakr, had nationalized al-ʿIrāq’s oil industry. With Hussein and his Hizbal, oust from the centre of power, lucrative systematic plans will undoubtedly follow. To enhance perennial profitability for U.S. (et al.) giant industrial corporations. As has been demonstrated in the post-World War II era when the U.S., prospered in its armaments productions.